Problem is, a lot of the stuff in the bathroom currently is genuinely vintage, but somewhat knackered (e.g. leaking toilet cistern, bath that seems to have been painted in something rather than re-enameled...). The tiles however, I absolutely hate.

It seems perverse to replace stuff that is actually old with fake old stuff, and I'm also totally bewildered by the range in price of stuff that is similar in design - anything from £1,000 for toilet, bath and sink to the same price for just a toilet.

Does a top-of-the range bathroom suite (e.g. Fired Earth) look any different to the cheapo stuff? Some of the repro Victorian sinks I've seen have a weird kind of bulbous look - is it because they are china rather than porcelain?

I think the only way you can tell is by going to the showrooms and having a look. If you like the cheap ones as much as the expensive ones... then go for the cheap ones! There might be a small difference in manufacture quality but I think the main difference is just in the styling.

I don't think it is perverse to replace real old with fake old - if the real old is knackered in some way and not mendable. (Leaking toilet cistern may be mendable, painted bath not sure).